World Journal of Dentistry

Register      Login

VOLUME 13 , ISSUE S2 ( Supplementary Issue 2, 2022 ) > List of Articles


Fabrication of a Two-piece Magnet-retained Orbital Prosthesis in a Post-COVID-19 Mucormycosis Case: A Simplified Evidence-based Approach

Vinay Dutta, Shubhangi Wate, Arun Khalikar, Sattyam Wankhede, Suryakanth Deogade, Archit Kapadia, Pradyumna Doibale

Keywords : Artificial eye, Post-coronavirus disease 2019 mucormycosis, Rhino-orbital cerebral mucormycosis, Silicon facial prosthesis

Citation Information :

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10015-2147

License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Published Online: 31-12-2022

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2022; The Author(s).


Aim: To bring into light an evidence-based approach to fabricate an orbital prosthesis in a post-coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) mucormycosis-affected individual, which is simple, efficient, and economically advantageous. Background: Rehabilitation of facial defects becomes a demanding task as it is noticed distinctly and might be a socially awkward situation for the individual. Especially, a missing eye/contents of the orbit have a negative impact on the patients, which necessitates immediate rehabilitation. Various treatment modalities are at hand to rehabilitate such patients, of which implant-supported prosthesis has a finer retentive outcome. However, it cannot be administered among all patients due to economic or other unfavorable surgical limitations. Case description: This case report projects a 54-year-old male; a case of exenterated orbit secondary to post-COVID-19 mucormycosis surgery. The reconstruction of this patient was planned by a two-piece magnet-retained prosthesis with a silicon outer prosthesis. A heat-processed acrylic conformer was fabricated for the defected part, and a silicon superstructure to reconstruct the missing anatomy was done. Retention was achieved using natural undercuts, magnet, and adhesive. Conclusion: A systematic and meticulous approach is warranted based on the tissue makeup, material handling, and retentive aids as per the patient's expectations and affordability for maxillofacial rehabilitation. An evidence-based, multidisciplinary approach with the skill of the clinician is essential in providing effective and optimum rehabilitation. The treatment strategy adopted in this case is simple and economical and can be adapted for mass rehabilitation of orbital defects at an accelerated pace. Clinical significance: Much research is necessary in the digital domain of maxillofacial prosthodontics such that it is financially affordable, accessible, and an approach that reduces chairside time. Also, retentive aids which have a more predictable outcome, like implants, should be considered so as to improve the quality of life of the patient.

PDF Share
  1. Gachake A, Fulsundar P, Kadam P. Prosthetic rehabilitation of a patient with acquired orbital defect using spectacle retained orbital prosthesis - a case report. J Prosthodontics Dent 2021;16(2):1–5.
  2. Trivedi MK, Guddu G, Daftary M, et al. Management of maxillary defect via obturator: a case report with review of literature. Turk J Physiother Rehabil 2022;32(3):35572–35581.
  3. Nyberg E, Farris A, Hung B, et al. 3d-printing technologies for craniofacial rehabilitation, reconstruction, and regeneration. Ann Biomed Eng 2017;45(1):45–57. DOI: 10.1007/s10439-016-1668-5
  4. Peyman GA, Sanders DR, Goldberg MF, editors. Principles and practice of ophthalmology. Saunders Limited. 1980.
  5. Singh AK, Singh R, Joshi SR, et al. Mucormycosis in COVID-19: a systematic review of cases reported worldwide and in India. Diabetes Metab Syndr 2021;15(4):102146. DOI: 10.1016/j.dsx.2021.05.019
  6. Kochar S, Lahane S, Thomas R, et al. Histopathological evidence of central retinal artery occlusion secondary to angio-invasive fungal infection amidst SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. Indian J Ophthalmol 2021;69(10):2875. DOI: 10.4103/ijo.IJO_1127_21
  7. Maurya RP. Indications for orbital exenteration in COVID-19 associated Rhino-orbito-cerebral Mucormycosis. IP Int J Ocul Oncol Oculoplasty 2021;7(2):105–108. DOI: 10.18231/j.ijooo.2021.023
  8. Zatezalo C, Bataineh Y, Johnson TE. Conservative treatment of congenital clinical anophthalmia. In anophthalmia 2020;pp. 231–241. Springer, Cham.
  9. Rasmussen ML, Ekholm O, Prause JU, et al. Quality of life of eye amputated patients. Acta Ophthalmol 2012;90(5):435–440. DOI: 10.1111/j.1755-3768.2010.02092.x
  10. AlShaibani R, Akhtar TM, Gentle M, et al. Digital applications of maxillofacial reconstruction – a systematic review. J Adv Dent 2021;1(1):21–27. DOI: 10.52870/jad.21004
  11. Anusavice KJ, Shen C, Rawls HR, editors. Phillips’ science of dental materials: Elsevier Health Sciences; 2012 Sep 27. 497–498.
  12. Pruthi G, Jain V, Sikka S. A novel method for retention of an orbital prosthesis in a case with continuous maxillary and orbital defect. J Indian Prosthodont Soc 2010;10(2):132–136. DOI: 10.1007/s13191-010-0025-x
  13. Beumer J, Curtis TA, Marunick MT. Maxillofacial rehabilitation: prosthodontic and surgical considerations. Ishiyaku EuroAmerica, St. Louis: 1996;377–453.
  14. Yi JH. Development of samarium–cobalt rare earth permanent magnetic materials. Rare Met 2014;33(6):633–640. DOI: 10.1007/s12598-014-0405-1
  15. Vasisht R, Prithviraj DR, Bhalla HK, et al. Two piece magnet retained orbital prosthesis: a case report. Dent Oral Craniofac Res 2016;2(1):212–216. DOI: 10.15761/DOCR.1000147
  16. Shrivastava KJ, Shrivastava S, Agarwal S, et al. Prosthetic rehabilitation of large mid-facial defect with magnet-retained silicone prosthesis. J Indian Prosthodont Soc 2015;15(3):276–280. DOI: 10.4103/0972-4052.161571
  17. Türksayar AAD, Saglam SA, Bulut AC. Retention systems used in maxillofacial prostheses: a review. Niger J Clin Pract 2019;22(12):1629–1634. DOI: 10.4103/njcp.njcp_92_19
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.